It is an abomination against God. Why would you want to be with someone that is blood related to you? That disgusts me! How can somebody feel comfortable sleeping with their sibling or parent or cousin or anybody related to them for that matter. If you really want to go to hell then go ahead.
First of all, we must eliminate child abuse and rape from the picture. Kids can't consent, and rape is rape. We are talking here about consensual incest where both parties are legally adults. Incest love is no picnic. Everybody hates it and condemns anybody who falls in love with a relative, especially a first-order relative (father-daughter, mother-son, brother-sister, etc.) Cousins, genetic half-siblings, step-siblings, etc. Are another category and should be completely legal. The original legal objection was because the book of Leviticus forbade it in the Bible, but of course the incest taboo goes back before written history. The justification for the laws (beyond hellfire and damnation) is the likelihood of genetic anomalies in children who are the product of incest. It is a very real risk, and absolutely must be avoided. The answer is vasectomy. IF the brother will undergo vasectomy and provide proof to the authorities that he is indeed sterile, then the couple should be permitted to conduct their affair or to marry just like anybody else. They could still even have children, with artificial insemination and non-genetically related sperm.
Heterosexuals often find homosexual sex to have a significant "ick" factor too, and especially when it involves teenage boys or young men, but yet homosexuality has been decriminalized. One cannot help who one falls in love with. I say that the laws against incest should be repealed. There are only about 2.3% of the population who ever participate in incest of any kind anyway. That's about 7 million people in the U.S., more or less.
As long as their is no reproduction involved, there is nothing wrong with consensual sex between family. They are not hurting anybody. I find it funny how homosexuality is legal yet incest is not. Incest is easy sex because you don't have to go out and find someone, it's convenient. Plus people who are single don't have to miss out on sex.
In Lawrence v. Texas, the US Supreme Court overturned a previous ruling, and they deemed laws against homosexual sex (sodomy laws) as unconstitutional. While not all incest is homosexual, the same principle that affected that decision is at play here... If two adults who are related by blood or marriage decide to consent to a sexual act, it should be permitted so long as they do so within a private environment, and keep to otherwise legal activity.
Even previous senator Rick Santorum agrees with this logic, while he expressed distaste at the outcome of this case: "We have laws in states, like the one at the Supreme Court right now, that has sodomy laws and they were there for a purpose.... And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything.... It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution"
But that privacy DOES exist. And the supreme court ruled that adults have the right to privacy in their bedroom.
While I have no interest in having sex with any of my own family members, I don't see the harm in other adults engaging in what is otherwise legal sexual activity. I do find the idea of parents having sex with their adult children a bit borderline, as they have a certain level of power and domination over them, but cousins and siblings generally do not.
For this reason I don't see a problem with, for example, a brother and sister (or brother/brother, sister/sister) having sex for the physical enjoyment of it and expression of intimacy. We hug our siblings and kiss each other on the cheek all the time and no-one cares. Why shouldn't adult-age siblings who are very close be able to take that one (large) step further and express their sibling love for each other with sexual intimacy.
If both parties are consenting adults, and appropriate measures are taken to avoid pregnancy, l don't see the harm. The only caveat would be relationships where one person holds some authority over the other, such as a parent/child relationship. In the case of siblings or cousins, I feel that they are on the same level and therefore their relationship would not be inappropriate.
Basically - The people opposed all say "What about the children?" - Let's make it easy then. Don't confuse sex with procreation. Let people have consensual (Over 18) sex, with whomever they choose - and for incestuous relationships don't have children. Regardless of relationship, this would be the first step in lessening the fear mongers on the other side.
As long as the parties are of consensual age, YES! If there is a child involved, NO! It's that simple. Many families are estranged throughout their lives because they cannot express themselves. This is another beautiful form of expression and as long as it's not forced; Live on and love on!
Why shouldn't two consenting adults be able to have sex with each other. It doesn't make sense that someone would be for same sex sex, but won't go for it if two people of the opposite gender want to have sex. It's up to the people having sex, If they want to and are mentally stable enough to have sex them who cares. It doesn't involve you so you shouldn't care.
Consensual GSA couples should be able to pursue romantic and sexual relationships as they see fit. I am appalled at the number of people who demonize these couples and make it so difficult for them to live normally. The most common arguments against consensual incest is usually procreation and the fact that the relationship can be turbulent due to its secretive nature.
1. While incestuous couples who birth children are at a slightly higher risk than non-incestuous couples, the actual chance of a "birth-defect" happening are still very low. I do not have the source on my person at the moment, but I remember reading that a "defect" would have a higher chance appearing in a woman giving birth who is over 45. Not to mention those individuals who carry traits for various disorders and illnesses.
2. The secretive nature of consensual GSA couples is due to the fact that people unfairly...Nay, cruelly harass these individuals and put so much pressure on them (instead of minding their own business) that eventually, something has to give. People try every underhanded tactic they can to push their views own the said coupling, calling them a colorful variety of insults, bringing religion to the mix, playing on their sense of guilt and giving them skewed views on GSA reproduction.
In the end, people claim to know what's best for a complete stranger and that is just mind boggling to me. I cannot and WILL not EVER understand people who have their minds closed and think an individual in a GSA relationship should break it up...Or worse, IMPRISONED, for a love that is not only consensual, but beautiful. Love comes in all forms. We are not here to judge the lives of others and if we find ourselves doing such a thing, then that simply means we must pay more attention to our own lives.
Ever since we hit puberty, we join the "sexual race" where we compete in order to seem appealing and desirable. Unconsciously, EVERY SINGLE THING we do, we do for sex and reproduction (blame evolution). Having a good job, building a social circle, looking attractive, is all part of the attempt to make us seem like better partners. Our sole purpose is to continue our genetic traits.
With that being said, I think that having a free-zone, where we can pull down our feathers, is necessary for us, mentally. If incestry became legalized, and a norm, then we would have no escape from the race, and our sexual radar would be constantly turned on.
We need that platonic love, where someone would die for us and vice versa, without being romantically or sexually attracted to us. Also, this might arouse separation between the family members, as a son might "friend-zone" or cheat on his mother, causing tension between all members of the family, including younger ones, who need a stable family. In fact, one of the biggest reasons for unhealthy states of mind, is growing up in an unstable family environment. I am all for freedom, but when it affects others, I would have to go against it.
I do not believe incest should be legal in any form. God did not make us to have sex with our relatives. Not only will incest destroy a person spiritually, it also causes physical and mental changes in our family blood lines. If this was every legalized the next step would be parents having sex with their children legally. If that should ever happen I believe our society would be completely destroyed.
Incest has long been taboo in most cultures. Even between consenting adults it is inappropriate behavior. Take the instance of a parent and child....Although the child may be 18 they are still subject to manipulation and possible exploitation by the mature and experienced parent. Legalizing incest opens the door for individuals to be abuse and emotionally crippled by those who are supposed to serve and protect them.
Childrens safety is very important and parents should take responsiblity of healthy growth of their own kids. Psychologically speaking, a persons ability to accept new people in their lifes will be destroyed that will create sociological problems. Pure love, respect, and safety of an individual within a family could be in risk of being destroyed as well. The side effects of such relationship is harmful to human body.
I can't see any benefit in permitting incest. The taboo exists for real reasons, beyond the supposed genetic risks of "swimming in your own gene pool". The incest taboo rightfully discourages sex between family members, because it is typically an abusive situation. So legalizing incest could make this kind of abusive situation more socially acceptable.
Incest should not be legal between two consenting adults, because of effects it will have on their children. Children born to people that are related by blood have higher risks of birth defects and deformities. Children should not have to bear the burden that their parents did when they decide to have incestuous relations.
There is no way that I could support incest between consenting adults. First of all, there is the consideration of children who might be born of these unions and what physical or mental infirmities they might experience. I believe that incest of any form among humans is unnatural, harmful and sinful and it may even be illegal. Just look at the emotional problems that many people who have experienced incest have faced. It might seem alright at first, but I believe there can be future ramifications from this type of relationship.
I don't think two logical minded adult would even choose incest as an available option. While centuries ago incest might have been the norm especially in royal families, there is no need for it today. There are plenty of people in the world for you to love that are not in your family. Incest also corrupts genes. Two people with similar genes biological should not be mating. If they do their children are subjected to physical, mental and genetic deformities, why would you purposely consent to a union in which any resulting offspring will be sick.
I am a very liberal person and felt the same way, until it hit home. My 8 year relationship was destroyed by a 21 year old stepdaughter that reunited with her father. She stated to me that there were no father and daughter ties as he left her when she was 18 months old. Now they are sexually attracted to one another. This man has two other daughters that have been raised with him in this family--there is a child with autism.
I guess it does hurt others and for that reason it should not be allowed. What happens to our relationship after so many years and how do you see the other two girls in this not being affected? Does it show the other sisters that this is correct? I dont even think that the mother of the other two girls knows about this.
The abolition of prohibition however will lead to an increase in cases of incest, and greatly increase the proportion of infants with genetic defect. Why we should not allow incest? In medical reasons, as you know, any methods of contraception are not 100% can avoid become pregnant. In the same family will carry the same recessive genes that cause deformities, illnesses, and in some cases sterility. Incest will leads the baby infants with genetic defect easily. Inbreeding leads to increased homozygous , which is the same allele pairs of chromosomes in the same position and will cause severe growth defects, the recessive deleterious alleles will not harmful when pairing the heterozygous , but when homozygous cause severe growth defects. This type of generations have a higher probability in die before reaching breeding age, the biologists call this phenomenon as inbreeding fading phenomenon. Thus, having sexual behavior between family members and close relatives will cause serious problems in the structure of DNA in the next generation. It is clear of the incest parties to know about that a child has a huge chance of being born with congenital deformities or disabilities. The legalization of incest also would narrow the human race's chances for survival. It shows that for who was incest and born a baby, they are really irresponsible and selfish, self-centered. Although many people think that incest is about people's civil liberties, the culture will automatically collapse.
There seems to be more than one possible reason why some cultures have had an incest taboo, incest also appears to be an adoption as law or culture of the Westermarck effect . Because of this effect, many people develop an avoidance of their close family members as sexual partners. If nobody had experienced the Westermarck effect, most people wouldn!|t have driven out by the dominant male and the human would have had a hard time to developing genetic diversity, which was very important to survival when the human population was low. That is not a question of the consentient. Consent may exist in either case. It is a question of the values to which society attaches such importance that their violation. They do more harm to the population long-term, since there's no possibility at all of a fully healthy child. Generally without a growing and genetically diverse population, the entire population could have easily destroyed by diseases (e.G. Huntington, cystic fibrosis, tay-sachs, sickle-cell anemia).